/I 


Catholic  Summer  School  Extension  Lectures 


EUGENICS 


A   LECTURE   BY 
LAWRENCE  F.  FLICK,  M.D. 


DELIVERED  IN  THE  CATHOLIC  SUMMER  SCHOOL 

EXTENSION     COURSE.      PHILADELPHIA 

JANUARY  17.  1913 


WITH    FOREWORD 

By    FRANCIS    p.    SIEGFRIED 


PHILADELPHIA 
JOHM      JOSEPH       McVEV 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  witin  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/eugenicslectureOOflicricli 


Catholic  Summer  School  Extension  Lectures 


EUGENICS 


A  LECTURE  BY 
LAWRENCE  F.  FLICK,  M.D. 


DELIVERED  IN  THE  CATHOLIC  SUMMER  SCHOOL 

EXTENSION     COURSE.     PHILADELPHIA 

JANUARY  17,  1913 


WITH    FOREWORD 

By   FRANCIS    p.    SIEGFRIED 


PHILADELPHIA 
JOHN      JOSEPH      McVEV 

1913 


HQ.7^' 

r^ 


Copyright,  1913 
JOHN  JOSEPH  McVEY 


FOREWORD 

The  present  lecture  is  the  first  of  a  series  of 
publications  which  are  to  appear  under  the  auspices 
of  the  Philadelphia  Board  of  the  Catholic  Summer 
School.  It  is  the  aim  of  the  Catholic  Summer 
School  to  extend  as  far  as  possible  to  our  larger 
cities,  and  throughout  the  year,  the  educational  and 
cultural  opportunities  which  it  provides  for  those 
who  attend  its  annual  sessions,  during  July  and 
August,  in  its  beautiful  home  at  Lake  Champlain 
(Cliff  Haven,  New  York).  With  a  view  to  giving 
a  wider  and  more  permanent  range  of  influence  to 
this  extension  work,  the  Board  which  represents 
the  Summer  School  in  Philadelphia  has  determined 
to  publish,  from  time  to  time,  some  of  the  lectures 
delivered  under  its  direction. 

In  giving  the  first  place  in  this  project  to  Dr. 
Flick's  paper  on  Eugenics,  the  Board  has  been 
influenced  both  by  the  vital  interest  of  the  subject 
and  by  the  prestige  of  the  lecturer.  The  Eugenist 
Movement  is  to-day  obsessing  the  minds  of  large 
numbers   of   men   and   women,   who,    in    all    good 

267793 


6  EUGENICS. 

disease  in  the  world;  also  the  innate  resistance  of 
all  living  organisms  to  that  which  is  inimical  to  life, 
and  the  growth  of  this  resistance  with  the  exercise  of 
it.  So  nicely  is  the  parasitism,  the  predatory  instinct, 
and  the  aggressiveness  of  living  beings  balanced  with 
the  instinct  of  self-preservation,  the  power  of  resist- 
ance and  dexterity  in  eluding  enemies,  that  in  the 
working  out  of  these  fundamental  laws  of  nature, 
the  best  is  preserved  and  the  worst  is  permitted  to 
fall  by  the  wayside;  all  of  this  is  in  the  interest  of 
eugenics,  and  has  been  in  operation  since  the  first 
living  thing  came  upon  the  earth. 

These  fundamental  laws  of  nature  operate  not 
only  in  the  lower  forms  of  life,  but  also  in  the 
higher,  and  even  in  the  human  family.  Thus,  in 
God's  providence,  that  which  seems  evil  in  the  sight 
of  men  is  permitted  to  work  for  man's  good,  and  to 
accomplish  it  in  fairness  to  all  without  infringing 
upon  the  rights  of  any  one. 

God  has,  moreover,  given  man  a  science  and  an 
art  of  eugenics  in  religion.  Man  is  a  com.pound 
being  composed  of  soul  and  body.  Religion  is 
primarily  for  the  soul,  but  also  for  the  body;  so 
closely  are  soul  and  body  united  that  they  have  one 
and  the  same  interest.  From  the  very  beginning 
God  gave  our  first  parents  religion  for  the  double 
purpose  of  maintaining  their  own  physical  well- 
being  and  that  of  their  offspring,  and  of  renewing 
their  spiritual  birthright.     The  religion  which  God 


EUGENICS.  7 

taught  his  chosen  people  through  Moses  and  the 
prophets  had  the  same  purposes;  and  when  Christ 
perfected  the  Old  Law,  He  increased  and  strength- 
ened man's  resources  for  these  ends.  The  world 
over,  wherever  there  has  been  religion,  however 
primitive,  it  has  had  this  double  object  in  view. 
Indeed,  whatever  is  in  the  interest  of  good  morals 
is  in  the  interest  of  eugenics;  and,  since  good  morals 
are  the  object  of  religion,  all  religion  must  be  in 
the  interest  of  eugenics.  Without  religion  eugenics 
is  impossible,  since  it  is  fundamentally  dependent 
upon  self-sacrifice  and  self-control. 

To  be  able  to  understand  eugenics,  one  must  have 
some  idea  of  life  and  the  laws  of  reproduction. 
Life  is  the  best  thing  on  earth.  It  came  from  God. 
It  is  a  mystery.  Man  has  not  penetrated  its  secret 
and  probably  never  will.  Our  first  parents  sought 
knowledge  of  it  from  the  fruit  of  the  Tree  and  found 
death;  since  then  mortal  man  has  sought  it  and  has 
found  confusion. 

Life  abounds  upon  the  surface  of  the  earth,  in 
the  waters  and  in  the  air.  It  exists  in  myriads  of 
forms  visible  and  invisible.  Whatever  its  form,  it 
is  fundamentally  the  same  and  is  subject  to  the  same 
laws.  Although  indefinable,  we  know  it  by  what 
it  does,  for  we  know  its  operations  in  man,  in  the 
animal  kingdom  generally,  in  the  vegetable  king- 
dom, and  in  the  micro-organic  world.  We  see  it 
in  all  that  is  useful  and  beautiful  on  earth.     From 


8  EUGENICS. 

the  phenomena  of  Hfe  we  have  learned  something 
about  the  laws  which  govern  it.  We  know  that 
it  is  maintained  in  the  body  which  it  animates  for 
a  span  of  time  by  chemical  interaction  of  organic 
substances  through  forces  which  are  inherent  in 
nature;  that  it  is  handed  down  from  the  form.s  in 
which  it  dwells  to  new  forms,  which  are  reproduced 
by  them;  and  that  it  finally  goes  out  of  the  form 
which  it  has  animated  when  that  form  has  accom- 
plished its  end.  We  speak  of  these  things  as  life, 
reproduction,  and  death. 

All  living  things  manifest  these  phenomena.  All 
have  power  to  transmit  life  either  individually  or 
in  union  with  another;  and  life  can  only  come  from 
pre-existing  forms  in  which  life  has  existed.  The 
transmission  of  life  is  concomitant  with  the  trans- 
mission of  form.  Two  primary  substances  called 
cells  are  necessary,  and  must  come  together.  These 
substances  are  made  by  the  living  forms  out  of 
matter  which  is  taken  in  as  food.  In  the  lowest  living 
things  the  two  substances  are  made  in  one  and  the 
same  individual,  which  is  therefore  called  "bi- 
sexual." In  the  higher  living  things  the  two  pri- 
mary substances  are  made  in  two  individuals 
differentiated  by  sex.  It  is  really  this  quality  of 
a  living  body  which  enables  it  to  make  out  of  matter 
from  without  one  of  the  primary  substances  for  the 
production  of  a  new  living  thing,  identical  in  form 
with  itself,  that  constitutes  sex.     One  of  the  indi- 


EUGENICS.  9 

viduals  is  known  as  the  father,  and  the  other  as  the 
mother.  For  the  development  of  the  new  being 
after  the  two  primary  substances  meet,  food,  proper 
temperature,  protection  and  rest  are  necessary.  The 
individual  which  supplies  these  is  the  mother.  The 
bringing  together  of  the  two  primary  substances, 
together  with  their  nutrition  and  protection  until  the 
new  living  form  has  been  completed,  is  reproduc- 
tion. 

The  principles  of  reproduction  are  the  same  in 
all  living  things;  but  reproduction  itself  varies  in  the 
scale  of  action  from  a  mere  automatic  division  of 
a  mature  form  in  the  lowest  livmg  thing  to  a  com- 
plicated procedure,  the  most  worthy  which  a 
creature  can  perform  in  the  order  of  nature.  God's 
wonders  and  man's  dignity  are  both  manifested  in 
it.  God's  providence  is  also  shown  in  it.  In  the 
lowest  living  things  God  has  made  transmission  of 
life  automatic;  in  the  higher  He  has  made  it  a 
matter  of  instinct;  in  man  alone  has  He  made  it  a 
deliberate  act  which  man  may  elect  or  decline  to 
perform.  All  creation  leads  up  to  man  and  bears 
the  mark  of  being  for  his  use  and  for  his  enjoyment. 
The  lowest  living  things,  the  micro-organic  entities, 
change  the  dead  organic  matter  into  inorganic 
matter,  and  largely  assist  in  preparing  the  inorganic 
matter  for  the  living  plant.  They  are  needed  in  such 
vast  numbers  that  reproduction  must  be  simple  and 
speedy.     Their  active  life  may  be  but  an  instant, 


10  EUGENICS. 

yet  in  that  time  they  perform  the  task  which  God 
has  allotted  to  them.  They  feed  the  vegetable 
kingdom  by  breaking  dead  organic  matter  into  inor- 
ganic matter,  and  at  the  same  time  they  protect  the 
earth  against  undue  accumulation  of  organic  matter. 
The  vegetable  kingdom  feeds  the  animal  kingdom. 
The  kingdom  of  plants  is  of  a  higher  order  than  the 
micro-organic  kingdom,  but  of  a  lov/er  order  than 
the  animal  kingdom.  Its  members,  too,  are  needed 
in  vast  numbers  and  must  reproduce  themselves 
rapidly.  Reproduction  is  more  complicated  than  in 
the  micro-organic  kingdom,  but  still  simple  and  cer- 
tain. It  no  longer  takes  place  by  division.  The  two 
primary  substances  necessary  for  reproduction  are 
produced  in  two  distinct  parts  of  the  living  being, 
and  must  be  brought  together;  there  are  males  and 
females;  a  mother  is  necessary;  and  there  is  a  per- 
ceptible time  between  the  lifetime  of  the  parent  and 
the  lifetime  of  the  offspring. 

All  entities  of  the  micro-organic  kingdom,  and 
some  entities  of  the  vegetable  kingdom,  are 
bi-sexual.  This  is  necessary  because  they  have  no 
locomotion.  In  a  few  entities  of  the  vegetable 
kingdom  the  sexes  are  separate.  So  much  above  the 
micro-organic  kingdom  is  the  vegetable  kingdom 
that  in  all  of  its  entities,  whether  the  sexes  be  in 
the  same  flower,  in  different  flowers,  or  even  in  dif- 
ferent plants,  the  two  primary  substances  necessary 
for  reproduction  must  be  brought  together  by  an 
extraneous  force,  such  as  an  insect  or  the  moving  air. 


EUGENICS.  1 1 

All  of  the  living  things  on  earth  are  interdepend- 
ent, but  from  the  lowest  to  the  highest  those  in  each 
lower  kingdom  serve  the  ones  higher  up.  Without 
the  micro-organic  kingdom,  the  vegetable  kingdom 
could  not  exist;  without  the  vegetable  kingdom  the 
animal  kingdom  could  not  exist,  and  both  are  neces- 
sary for  man. 

In  the  animal  kingdom  below  man,  reproduction 
is  governed  by  instinct  and  is  subject  to  innate  laws. 
These  laws  differ  somewhat  in  different  animals 
according  to  size,  place  inhabited,  food,  wildness, 
or  domestication.  Whatever  the  laws,  they  are 
fulfilled,  unless  interfered  with  by  extraneous  forces, 
even  at  the  jeopardy  of  Ufe;  but  the  reproductive 
impulse  is  used  only  for  what  God  has  made  it. 
There  is  no  waste  of  reproductive  energy.  No  law 
of  nature  is  transgressed,  nor  is  there  any  inclina- 
tion to  do  so. 

In  man  alone  is  reproduction  subjected  to  the 
will,  although  in  him,  too,  there  is  a  reproductive 
impulse.  This  impulse  is  transmutable  into  intel- 
lectuality. He  may  elect  to  transmit  his  kind  or  he 
may  decline  to  do  so.  He  does  not  transgress  the 
laws  of  nature  when  he  declines.  He  cannot  be 
both  a  human  being  and  an  animal.  As  a  human 
being  he  is  subject  to  laws  which  are  not  in  the 
order  of  nature,  but  in  the  order  of  religion,  coming 
from  God  either  by  inspiration  or  by  revelation.     It 


12  EUGENICS. 

is  vain  for  him  to  try  to  govern  himself  by  the  laws 
which  govern  the  animal  kingdom.  When  he  tries 
it  he  goes  down  to  perdition.  But  since  he  has  been 
given  this  high  position  by  God,  he  must  accept  the 
responsibilities  which  go  with  it,  unless  he  wishes  to 
default  as  a  human  being. 

Eugenics  has  been  spoken  of  as  a  science,  and 
it  might  be  called  a  science  of  reproduction.  In 
reality,  however,  we  have  as  yet  very  few  scientific 
data  bearing  upon  Eugenics.  We  have  a  founda- 
tion, furnished  us  by  an  Augustinian  monk,  the 
Right  Reverend  Abbot  Mendel,  the  discoverer  of 
what  are  known  as  the  Mendelian  Laws.*  Abbot 
Mendel  was  bom  in  1822,  and  was  the  son  of  a 
farmer.  He  had  a  great  taste  for  botany,  and 
evidently  also  extraordinary  talents  for  it.  In  his 
monastic  gardens  in  Silesia,  Austria,  he  carefully 
studied  plant  life,  and  from  his  observations  was 
able  to  formulate  some  definite  laws  about  heredity. 
He  used  garden  peas  for  his  observations,  and  later 
on  other  plants  also.  He  found  that  when  he  arti- 
ficially fertilized  the  flowers  of  a  tall  stalk  with  the 
pollen  from  the  flower  of  a  short  stalk,  the  first 
product  was  invariably  a  tall  stalk.  When  he  re- 
planted the  seeds  from  this  second  generation,  how- 
ever, he   found  that  in  the  third  generation  there 

*  Mendel's  original  papers  are  published  in  aai  appendix 
of  Bateson's  book  on  MendeVs  Principles  of  Heredity. 
New  York:    Putnam,  1909. 


EUGENICS.  13 

were  tall  stalks  and  short  stalks  in  the  proportion 
of  three  to  one.  When  he  planted  the  seed  again 
from  this  third  generation,  he  found  in  the  fourth 
generation  that  all  of  the  short  stalks  produced  short 
stalks,  that  one-third  of  the  tall  stalks  produced  tall 
stalks,  and  that  two-thirds  of  the  tall  stalks  pro- 
duced both  tall  and  short  stalks.  The  tendency  of 
the  first  generation  of  his  cross-breeding  to  produce 
only  tall  stalks,  he  called  the  "dominant"  tendency, 
and  the  tendency  in  the  third  generation  to  produce 
short  stalks,  which  were  latent  in  the  tall  stalks  of 
the  second  generation,  he  called  the  "recessive" 
tendency.  In  subsequent  generations,  he  found  that 
the  true  tall  stalks  produced  only  tall  stalks,  the 
true  short  stalks  produced  only  short  stalks,  and  the 
mixed  stalks  again  divided  up  in  the  same  ratio  as 
before;  that  is,  one  with  the  dominant  tendency  and 
two  with  the  mixed  tendency.  Mendel  found  these 
laws  exemplified  in  other  plants. 

Simultaneously  with  Mendel,  Sir  Francis  Galton, 
an  Englishman,  bom  likewise  in  the  year  1822, 
studied  heredity  on  a  statistical  basis.  He  examined 
the  genealogical  records  of  a  number  of  English 
families  to  see  what  tendencies  were  transmitted 
to  the  offspring.*  He  reached  the  conclusion  that 
ability  and  character  were  transmitted,  and  he 
worked    out    some    very    interesting    but    extremely 

*  See  Gallon's  Hereditary  Ccnius.  New  York:  Mac- 
millan  &  Co..   1869. 


14  EUGENICS. 

abstruse  theories.  Gallon  pursued  the  study  of 
heredity  for  many  years,  and  wrote  quite  a  number 
of  books  on  the  subject.  He  has  not  given  us  any 
accurate  scientific  data,  however,  upon  which 
definite  laws  could  be  based  such  as  those  discovered 
by  Mendel.  Galton  took  inspiration  from  the  work 
of  Mendel  and  that  of  Darwin,  and  probably  used 
the  ideas  of  these  men  as  the  basis  of  his  work.  It 
was  he,  more  than  any  one  else,  who  kept  alive  and 
fostered  the  modern  movement  of  eugenics. 

Many  men  and  women  have  entered  upon  the 
study  of  this  subject.  Chairs  have  been  established 
for  it  both  in  England  and  in  America;  a  labora- 
tory has  been  established  in  its  interest  in  England, 
and,  during  July  of  1912,  an  international  congress 
was  held  in  London  for  the  purpose  of  discussing 
it  from  every  point  of  view.  This  congress  was 
attended  by  men  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  and 
papers  on  a  great  variety  of  phases  of  the  subject 
were  read  and  discussed.  Some  strange  doctrines 
were  advanced,  at  variance  with  accepted  views  in 
m.orals  and  in  physics.  Som.e  of  these  doctrines 
had  at  that  time  already  found  their  way  into  cur- 
rent literature.  We  may  expect  to  see  much  more 
of  them  in  the  future.  They  are  not  promulgated 
by  those  who  study  the  subject  thoroughly,  but 
rather  by  onlookers  who  seize  ideas  here  and  there 
and,  without  understanding  them,  build  codes  of 
ethics  on  them  and  even  seek  to  mould  the  habits 


EUGENICS.  1 5 

and  customs  of  the  entire  world  by  them.  Some 
of  these  "onlookers"  speak  from  lofty  places  in  the 
world  of  literature,  and  may  do  much  harm. 

The  fascinating  theories  of  Dar\vin  and  the 
accurate  work  of  Mendel  raised,  in  some,  great 
hopes  that  facts  might  be  discovered  and  laws 
formulated  which  would,  through  purely  human 
effort,  lead  to  the  elimination  of  ills  from  the  human 
fam.ily.  Up  to  the  present  time  the  bright  expecta- 
tions have  been  dulled  by  disappointment.  Mendel's 
studies  have  been  carried  forward,  but  have  not 
carried  us  much  beyond  Mendel.  Wonderful 
things  have  been  accomplished  in  hybridizing 
plants,  but  when  analyzed  they  merely  amount  to 
changes  in  color,  size,  quality,  and  fertility  of  living 
beings  in  the  same  kingdom  and  within  a  circum- 
scribed sphere.  Inedible  plants  have  oeen  made 
edible,  and  unattractive  fruits  have  been  made 
delicious.  It  has  been  impossible  to  elevate  a  living 
entity  from  a  lower  kingdom  into  a  higher.  When 
the  so-called  change  in  species  has  been  carried  too 
far  it  has  met  with  an  abrupt  ending  in  sterility. 
What  has  been  accomplished  in  plant  life  has  been 
likewise  done,  although  in  a  lesser  degree,  in  animal 
life.  Here,  too,  it  has  been  possible,  by  cross- 
breeding, to  make  changes  in  the  interests  of  utility 
and  beauty,  but  when  the  process  has  been  carried 
too  far,  it,  too,  has  found  its  limitation  in  sterility. 


16  EUGENICS. 

The  theory  of  evolution,  so  satisfying  to  the  mind 
which  seeks  to  fathom  all  things  and  explain  them 
in  an  orderly  way,  has  not  found  any  support  in 
either  the  most  recent  developments  of  biological 
research  or  in  the  new  archaeological  discoveries. 
The  last  word  in  biology  seems  to  indicate  that  like 
produces  like,  and  that  all  living  things  come  from 
other  living  things  of  the  same  kind  and  character. 
Pasteur  gave  the  death-blow  to  the  spontaneous 
origin  of  life.  The  old  fallacy  is  again  embryonic 
in  the  recent  claims  of  artificial  fertilization  of  an 
egg,  but  there  is  little  prospect  of  it  ever  maturing 
into  even  an  acceptable  doctrine.  There  is  a  long 
step  between  the  artificial  fertilization  of  an  egg  and 
the  production  of  an  egg.  The  one  involves  the 
stimulation  into  activity  of  the  life  which  God  has 
put  into  the  egg;  the  other,  the  creation  of  life.* 

Historically,  we  have  nothing  in  support  of  the 
theory  of  evolution  of  man  from  the  lowest  living 
entities.  The  first  man  of  whom  we  have  any 
historical  record  was  as  good,  nay  better,  than  the 
present  man.  He  had  even  a  higher  code  of  ethics. 
He  was  endowed  by  the  Creator  with  all  the  gifts 
of  a  social  being.  He  was  as  perfect  in  form  and 
feature.  We  are  assured  that  he  knew  more  of  the 
works  of  nature  and  of  the  relationship  between  God 

*  Thoughts  of  a  Catholic  Anatomist,  by  Thomas 
Dwight,  M.  D.  (New  York:  Longmans,  Green  &  Co.),  is 
well  worth  reading  for  the  elucidation  of  this  subject. 


EUGENICS.  1 7 

and  man.  Later  history  shows  the  undeveloped  man 
only  in  the  outlying  districts,  away  from  the  centers 
from  which  he  went  out  to  subdue  and  cultivate  the 
earth.  In  the  place  where  the  garden  of  Eden  is 
said  to  have  been,  history  reveals  man  to  us  in  a  per- 
fect state.  What  glimpses  we  have  into  the  dark, 
dim  vista  of  the  past  around  the  Tigris  and  Eu- 
phrates reveal  a  high  grade  of  civilization.  We  can 
trace  that  civilization  in  its  degeneration  to  a  low 
ebb  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  and  again 
in  its  rise  from  that  point. 

We  hear  much  of  heredity  in  eugenics.  WTiilst 
reproduction  is  made  the  foundation,  heredity  is 
made  the  excuse.  The  foundation  is  good.  Is  the 
excuse  valid?  There  is  room  for  doubt.  To  start 
with,  there  is  a  false  syllogism:  Physical  defects, 
diseases  and  degeneracy  are  transmitted  from  parent 
to  offspring;  they  are  evils  which  the  human  family 
might  well  be  rid  of;  therefore,  reproduction  should 
be  controlled,  curtailed  and,  if  necessary,  stopped. 

A  great  many  statistics  have  been  gathered  to 
prove  that  physical  defects,  diseases  and  degeneracy 
are  hereditary.  The  public  mind  has  been  quite 
open  to  these  ideas,  especially  as  regards  heredity 
of  diseases,  on  account  of  many  confusing  coinci- 
dences and  the  frequent  occurrence  of  phenomena, 
the  easiest  explanation  of  which  is  heredity.  Most 
of  the  statistics  have  been  gathered  by  men  who 
started  out  to  prove  a  theory.     In  the  conclusions 


18  EUGENICS. 

there  has  been  inadequate  differentiation  between 
the  effects  of  heredity  and  the  effects  of  environ- 
ment. At  best,  statistics,  except  when  used  on  a 
very  large  scale  and  from  a  very  broad  viewpoint, 
furnish  unsafe  premises  for  conclusions. 

The  weakness  of  the  argument  from  statistics 
can,  perhaps,  best  be  pointed  out  in  some  of  the 
studies  of  degeneracy  which  have  been  built  upon 
the  investigation  of  long  genealogies  to  prove  that 
individuals  with  certain  diseases  or  defects,  left 
progenies  of  degenerates,  whilst  healthy  individuals 
with  one-half  of  the  same  ancestry  left  progenies 
of  normal  beings.  The  story  runs  something  like 
this:  A  normally  healthy  man  has  a  child,  out  of 
wedlock,  by  a  woman  physically  or  morally  unfit; 
subsequently,  he  has  other  children  in  wedlock  by 
a  woman  physically  and  morally  fit.  The  offspring 
of  the  child  of  the  first  woman  is  shown  to  have 
many  degenerates  in  her  progeny,  whilst  the  offspring 
of  the  children  of  the  second  woman  is  shown  to 
have  many  finely  developed  and  even  brilliant  cit- 
izens in  theirs. 

The  merest  tyro  in  logic  must  see  at  a  glance  the 
absurdity  of  trying  to  draw  deductions  on  heredity 
from  these  two  lines  of  progeny.  The  one  line 
starts  out  with  a  breach  of  the  laws  and  customs  of 
civilization,  with  both  parents  defaulting  in  their 
duty,  with  a  fore-ordained  life  of  outlawry  from 
decency  and  home,  and  with  the  brand  of  sin  and 


EUGENICS.  19 

irregularity  stamped  upon  it.  The  other  hne  starts 
out  with  the  protection  of  law  and  society,  under 
the  custody  of  both  parents,  in  the  shelter  of  love 
and  home,  and  with  its  banner  of  propriety  unfurled 
to  the  air.  The  one  line,  if  it  is  to  return  to  decency 
and  civilization,  must  fight  its  way  back  against  in- 
surmountable difficulties;  the  other  is  fenced  in  by 
the  habits  and  customs  of  civilized  life,  and  in  such 
a  way  that  it  would  be  difficult  for  it  to  get  out  of 
the  traces  of  respectability. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  physical  defects,  diseases, 
and  degeneracy  can,  in  a  biological  sense,  be  trans- 
mitted from  parent  to  offspring.  The  primary  sub- 
stances which  go  to  make  the  new  being  are  gen- 
erated by  the  body  from  which  they  come,  and 
undoubtedly  must  be  affected  by  the  normality  and 
healthfulness  of  that  body  in  its  functional  capacity. 
They  are  new  elements,  and  when  they  unite  they 
form  an  independent  being.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
but  that  the  characteristics  of  the  parents  may  be 
transmitted  to  the  offspring  through  these  primary 
substances,  and  that  union  of  two  characteristics  of 
the  same  kind  might  produce  an  extremely  exag- 
gerated characteristic  in  the  product.  In  the  same 
way,  union  of  two  defective  qualities  of  the  parents 
might  produce  an  extremely  defective  quality  in  the 
offspring.  The  primary  substances  might  even  be 
so  weak  that  the  product  would  be  weak  in  all  its 
parts,  and  perhaps  not  even  viable.      It  would  seem, 


20  EUGENICS. 

however,  to  be  physically  impossible  that  a  disease 
which  is  due  to  a  living  entity  could  be  engrafted 
upon  a  new  product.* 

Around  offspring  nature  has  thrown  extraordi- 
nary protection  against  transmission  of  disease  from 
parents.  It  has  given  the  child,  even  while  depend- 
ent upon  its  mother's  circulation  for  nutrition,  an 
independent  circulation,  and  has  placed  a  physical 
barrier  between  the  circulation  of  the  mother  and 
the  circulation  of  the  child.  Between  the  father 
and  the  child  stands  not  only  this  barrier,  but  the 
barrier  of  the  mother  herself.  It  is,  therefore,  not 
quite  consistent  with  physiological  truth  to  speak  of 
poisoning  the  blood-stream  of  the  offspring  through 
the  parents;  and  the  old  saying  of  a  taint  in  the 
blood  must  be  taken  figuratively,  not  literally. 

With  the  facts  before  us,  the  transmissibility  of 
disease,  at  one  time  a  universally  accepted  doctrine, 
is  no  longer  tenable.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the 
principles  of  biology,  and  has  been  disproven  both 
by  research  and  by  experimental  work.  Tubercu- 
losis, for  example,  which  at  one  time  was  regarded 
as  the  most  typical  of  hereditary  diseases,  has  been 
proven  to  be  due  to  a  living  entity  with  an  inde- 
pendent biology,  and  therefore  to  be  essentially  con- 

*  On  the  subject  of  transmissibility  of  characteristics. 
Heredity)  Genius;  An  Inquiry  into  Its  Laws  and  Conse- 
quences, by  Francis  Gallon,  F.  R.  S.,  etc.  (New  York: 
Macmillan  &  Co.,  1869),  is  worth  reading. 


EUGENICS.  21 

tagious.  It  may  be  transmitted  to  the  unborn  child 
by  the  mother,  but  only  when  the  barrier  between 
the  circulation  of  the  mother  and  the  circulation  of 
the  child  has  become  infected  with  the  disease.  In 
such  a  case,  the  transmission  is  not  by  inheritance, 
but  by  contact:  even  in  syphilis,  when  the  offspring 
is  affected,  the  disease  has  had  its  beginning  by  infec- 
tion of  the  tissues  of  the  child  before  birth. 

The  strongest  evidence  which  has  so  far  been 
gathered  in  support  of  the  transmissibility  of  disease 
is  that  which  has  to  do  with  borderland  conditions, 
such  as  night-blindness,  color-blindness,  albinism, 
praesenile  cataract,  certain  abnormal  skin  conditions 
and  a  few  other  physical  abnormalities.*  Whilst 
these  are  diseases  in  the  broad  sense,  they  are  not 
in  the  ordinary  sense.  They  may  be  due  to  nutri- 
tional defects  in  the  primary  substances  which  make 
the  new  being.  But,  even  in  these  borderland  con- 
ditions, heredity  has  not  been  proven.  All  of  the 
phenomena  could  be  explained  upon  the  hypothesis 
that  the  conditions  are  due  to  the  action  of  micro- 
organisms upon  the  tissues  of  the  body  and  con- 
veyed by  the  parents  to  the  offspring  either  before 
birth  or  after.  It  is  well  known  that  the  same 
micro-organisms  may  set  up  fatal  disease  in  some 
individuals  and  may  exist  in  others  without  giving 

*  MendeVs  Principles  of  Heredity,  by  W.  Baleson. 
M.  A..  F.  R.  S.,  V.  H.  M.  (New  York:  Putnam,  1909). 
gives  us  some  interesting  data  upon  this  subject. 


22  EUGENICS. 

rise  to  serious  inconvenience.  It  is  even  within  the 
realms  of  possibiHty  that  the  same  micro-organisms 
might  set  up  symptoms  in  persons  of  one  sex  and 
not  cause  them  in  persons  of  the  other  sex.  The 
pecuhar  phenomenon  of  sex  hmitation  in  these 
borderland  conditions  would  be  more  intelligible 
upon  this  hypothesis  than  upon  any  other.  Such  a 
condition  might  exist  in  the  father,  and  the  micro- 
organisms might  be  conveyed  to  the  mother  without 
setting  up  any  symptoms  in  her,  and  be  transferred 
by  the  mother  to  the  sons,  who  in  turn  would  again 
manifest  the  symptoms. 

Even  the  more  subtle  heredity  of  what  is  called 
predisposition  could  be  explained  in  this  way.  We 
speak  of  heredity  of  gout,  of  apoplexy,  of  affections 
of  the  mucous  membranes,  and  of  other  conditions. 
We  do  not  as  yet  know  all  about  the  micro- 
organisms which  may  infest  the  human  body;  and 
it  is  quite  possible  that  there  are  micro-organisms 
which  do  not  produce  disease  in  the  ordinary  sense 
of  that  term,  but  which,  growing  on  the  mucous 
membranes  or  even  in  the  tissues  of  the  body,  pour 
into  the  circulation  substances  which  have  the  power 
of  determining  changes  in  the  nervous  tissue,  in  the 
blood  vessels,  or  even  in  the  mucous  membranes. 
The  conditions  set  up  by  the  poisons  given  off  by 
these  micro-organisms  might  readily  be  the  pre- 
dispositions which  we  speak  of  under  the  names 
just  mentioned.     Such  micro-organisms  might  easily 


EUGENICS.  23 

be  conveyed  by  contagion  from  parents  to  children 
and  be  carried  through  life  by  them  without  pro- 
ducing phenomena  which  would  arouse  attention. 
Until  we  know  all  about  micro-organic  life  and  its 
effect  upon  health  and  happiness,  it  would  be  well 
to  suspend  judgment  about  the  transmissibility  of 
disease.  At  all  events,  until  the  whole  subject  has 
been  threshed  out,  we  are  not  yet  ready  to  adopt 
drastic  measures  for  the  prevention  of  what  are 
called  hereditary  diseases.* 

There  is  still  another  side  to  this  question  of 
heredity  which  must  be  considered.  All  living 
things  have  an  inherent  power  of  self-defense 
against  parasitism  and  agencies  detrimental  to  life 
or  prejudicial  to  normality.  This  power  is 
strengthened  with  exercise  and,  as  it  resides  in  the 
cells  themselves,  becomes  cumulative  in  the  indi- 
vidual, may  be  transmitted  to  offspring,  and  may 
even  become  cumulative  in  the  family  from  genera- 
tion to  generation.  That  this  power  exists  and 
accumulates  is  indicated  by  what  is  knowTi  as  family 

*  In  books  on  heredity  of  insanity,  it  is  claimed  that  from 
20  per  cent,  to  50  per  cent,  of  insane  people  have  a  family 
history  of  insanity.  This  is  merely  a  statistical  argument, 
the  same  as  that  which  for  ages  was  used  to  prove  tuber- 
culosis to  be  hereditary,  and  in  itself  proves  nothing. 
Autopsies  show  that  most  insane  people  have  undergone 
pathological  changes  in  the  brain  and  its  membranes,  in 
one  or  both. 


24  EUGENICS. 

and  racial  resistance  to  disease.  We  see  it  in  the 
African's  resistance  to  malaria  and  the  Hebrew's 
resistance  to  tuberculosis.  The  African  gets  malaria 
just  the  same  as  the  white  man  who  goes  to  Africa, 
but  having  accumulated  a  resistance  through  many 
generations,  does  not  readily  succumb  to  it.  The 
Hebrew  gets  tuberculosis  as  frequently  as  do  people 
of  other  races,  but  the  disease  is  usually  mild.  The 
African  and  the  American  Indian,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  have  not  yet  developed  racial  resistance 
to  tuberculosis  because  they  have  been  exposed  to 
it  only  for  a  comparatively  short  time,  develop  it 
in  a  most  malignant  form  and  almost  invariably  die 
of  it.  Really,  instead  of  disease  being  trans- 
missible from  parent  to  offspring,  we  have  reason 
to  believe  that  resistance  to  disease  is  transmissible. 
To  prohibit  or  interfere  with  reproduction  in  those 
who  are  affected  with  diseases  which  sometimes  are 
called  hereditary  might,  therefore,  from  a  biological 
point  of  view,  be  a  step  in  the  wrong  direction. 

Reproduction  is  an  inherent  right,  as  sacred  as 
the  right  of  life,  liberty,  and  property.  It  is  really 
an  essential  part  of  those  rights,  and  cannot  be 
separated  from  them.  God  has  given  it  to  man, 
and,  except  when  it  has  been  forfeited  by  a  crime 
against  society,  no  man  can  take  it  away  without 
committing  a  heinous  offense  against  God.  As  a 
man  may  forfeit  his  life  by  taking  the  life  of 
another,  or  his  liberty  and  property  by  interfering 


EUGENICS.  25 

with  the  Hberty  and  property  of  another,  so  he  may 
also  forfeit  his  right  of  reproduction  when  he  has 
committed  against  society  a  crime  which  merits  such 
a  punishment.  All  the  protection  which  is  thrown 
around  the  individual  for  the  maintenance  of  his 
rights  of  life,  liberty  and  property,  must  also  be 
thrown  around  him  for  the  maintenance  of  his  right 
of  reproduction.  To  surrender  this  right  to  the 
caprices  of  one  or  two  or  three  men,  upon  an  un- 
proven  theory,  and  against  one  who  has  not  com- 
mitted against  society  any  offense  worthy  of  such  a 
punishment,  is  to  pave  the  way  for  the  surrender 
of  our  liberties  and  our  rights  of  property. 

It  took  Christianity  over  twelve  hundred  years  to 
produce  the  Magna  Charta,  that  great  charter  of 
human  rights.  Those  rights  had  been  lost  to  man- 
kind through  the  selfishness  and  brutality  of  man. 
Up  to  the  time  of  Christ's  coming  into  the  world, 
in  vain  had  the  law  of  Moses  and  the  voices  of  the 
prophets  struggled  for  their  restoration.  Christ's 
sweet  gospel  of  love  brought  into  the  struggle  a 
new  force  which  nothing  could  resist,  yet  even  this 
force  required  more  than  a  millennium  to  win  that 
much  of  the  victory.  From  the  Magna  Charta  to 
the  present  day  wonderful  strides  have  been  made 
in  the  fight  for  man's  rights,  and  the  progress  must 
be  attributed  to  the  religion  taught  by  Christ.  Is 
man  prepared  to  sacrifice  all  that  has  been  won  for 


26  EUGENICS. 

him  and  begin  to  retrace  his  steps  back  to  social 
chaos  ? 

What  are  the  essential  conditions  for  eugenics? 
What  is  it  that  is  necessary  to  be  well  born?  First, 
there  must  be  healthy  parents  of  normal  physical 
development,  living  normal  physical  lives;  second, 
there  must  be  normal  sexual  attraction;  and  third, 
the  parents  must  live  chaste  lives.  With  all  of  these 
conditions  fulfilled,  the  offspring  is  bound  to  be 
good;  with  any  of  them  unfulfilled,  it  may  be  bad. 
Fortunately,  nature  is  wonderfully  jealous  of  the 
well-being  of  offspring,  sacrificing  everything  in  its 
behalf,  even  the  parents  when  necessary,  and  thus 
often  makes  it  good  even  when  the  essential  con- 
ditions are  somewhat  defective.  In  consequence  of 
this  conserving  watchfulness  of  nature,  a  healthy 
offspring  may  come  from  sickly  parents,  and  a  good 
product  may  result  even  when  the  mutual  sexual 
attraction  is  defective.  There  seems  to  be  one  con- 
dition, however,  against  which  nature  can  make 
no  compensatory  provision,  and  that  is  sexual 
profligacy.  For  the  unchaste  there  can  be  no  good 
offspring,  and  it  is  through  unchastity  and  the  many 
irregularities  of  life  which  go  with  it  that  most  of 
the  degeneration  of  the  human  family  comes  into 
existence. 

Unfortunately,  the  average  modern  eugenist, 
and,  I  regret  to  say,  the  Eugenics  Education 
Society,  leave  this  last  important  fact  out  of  their 


EUGENICS.  27 

philosophy  in  dealing  with  this  important  subject. 
They  ignore  religion,  they  ignore  Christ,  and  they 
seek  to  build  up  a  system  of  eugenics  upon  a 
materialistic  platform.  They  fail  to  recognize  that 
there  is  no  pov/er  on  earth  except  religion  which  can 
maintain  the  essential  conditions  for  eugenics  in  the 
human  family;  and  they  have  not  studied  history 
well. 

In  those  matters  which  are  essential  to  eugenics, 
it  is  not  within  the  nature  of  man  to  be  controlled 
by  man-made  laws  and  by  ordinances  unfounded 
upon  the  authority  of  a  supreme  being  through 
religion.  Sexuality  is  an  appetite;  and  parenthood, 
in  the  animal  sense,  depends  upon  instinct.  As  a 
rational  being,  man  can  control  his  appetite  and 
direct  his  instincts,  but  he  must  have  a  motive  strong 
enough  to  impel  his  will.  Good  progeny  does  not 
give  him  such  a  motive,  because  progeny  is  a  pros- 
pective good  in  the  material  order  of  things,  of 
which  man  can  form  only  an  abstract  idea,  and  for 
which  he  must  sacrifice  a  good  which  is  at  hand 
in  concrete  form  and  toward  which  he  has  an  over- 
powering inclination. 

All  through  history  we  see  the  impotency  of 
mere  human  effort  for  eugenics,  and  in  contrast  with 
it  the  power  of  God's  word.  The  natural  laws, 
aided  by  man's  intelligence,  are  exemplified  in  man's 
savage  life;  and  God's  law,  aided  by  divine  grace, 
in  civilized  life.     TTie  best  people  physically  and 


28  EUGENICS. 

socially  always  were  God's  people.  Even  among 
the  people  from  whose  minds  the  idea  of  God 
had  almost  faded,  and  with  whom  religion  had 
drifted  into  idolatry,  it  was  religion  which  main- 
tained some  sort  of  relationship  between  members 
of  the  human  family  in  the  interest  of  eugenics;  and 
civilization  flourished  among  them  through  the 
religion  of  the  masses.  The  customs  and  habits  of 
the  people  were  based  upon  religion,  and  their  laws 
and  ordinances  were  conducive  to  civilization  in 
proportion  to  their  foundation  on  divine  authority 
and  the  extent  to  which  they  obtained  support 
through  the  religious  views  of  the  people. 

The  definition  of  eugenics  as  given  by  the 
Eugenics  Education  Society  of  England,  the 
program  of  the  First  International  Congress  on 
Eugenics,  many  of  the  ideas  which  were  given  ex- 
pression to  at  that  congress,  most  of  the  books  which 
have  recently  been  written  upon  the  subject,  and 
some  of  the  ideas  which  have  found  their  way  into 
literature  from  participants  in  the  eugenic  movement, 
make  a  discordant  hodge-podge  of  bad  philosophy, 
overgrown  humanity  born  of  an  extremely  diluted, 
illy  nourished,  anaemic  Christianity,  and  an  uncon- 
scious erotism  which  does  not  bode  well  for  civiliza- 
tion. 

The  Eugenics  Education  Society  tells  us  that  the 
racial  qualities  of  future  generations  are  to  be  im- 
proved physically  and  mentally,  and  that  this  is  to 


EUGENICS.  29 

be  done  with  agencies  under  social  control.  Nothing 
is  said  about  religion,  and  since  religion  is  not  under 
social  control  we  may  assume  that  it  is  excluded 
from  the  program.  We  may  also  infer  that  the 
study  has  a  practical  purpose,  and  that  this  purpose 
is  to  suppress  those  racial  qualities  which  impair 
future  generations  physically  and  mentally,  and  to 
foster  such  as  will  improve  those  qualities. 

What  are  the  agencies  under  social  control?  In 
a  broad  way,  we  may  say  they  are  the  habits  and 
customs  of  the  people  and  the  legal  restrictions  and 
curtailments  of  natural  rights  which  have  been  mu- 
tually agreed  upon  in  civilized  comn!unities  and  writ- 
ten out  in  the  forms  of  constitutions,  laws,  and  ordi- 
nances. The  customs  and  habits  of  the  people, 
whilst  they  are  in  a  sense  under  social  control,  really 
grow  out  of  the  religion,  physical  well-being,  and 
state  of  enlightenment  of  the  people.  They  are  the 
legacies  of  many  generations  and  usually  are  handed 
down  by  tradition.  They  are  hard  to  change  and 
cannot  be  changed,  even  amongst  the  most  enlight- 
ened people,  in  a  single  generation.  When  they 
change  they  do  so  gradually,  without  consciousness 
of  the  people,  reacting  to  new  ideas  which  have 
found  lodgment  in  the  public  mind.  It  is  difficult 
to  picture  to  one's  self  what  the  habits  and  customs 
of  a  people  would  be  which  were  built  upon  a  purely 
materialistic  basis  without  the  aid  of  religion.  His- 
tory helps  us  to  form  some  idea  of  it.     At  the  height 


30  EUGENICS. 

of  the  Grecian  and  Roman  civilizations  women  and 
children  were  chattels  without  rights,  the  poor  were 
abandoned  to  their  misfortunes,  children  could  be 
sold  or  be  permitted  to  die  in  the  market-place  or 
on  vacant  lots;  there  were  no  eleemosynary  institu- 
tions; there  was  no  public  charity;  a  man  could  put 
away  his  wife  when  he  pleased  and  take  another; 
and  human  life  had  no  value  except  what  it  was 
worth  to  the  government.  These  habits  and  cus- 
toms, moreover,  existed  in  peoples  who  were  not 
entirely  devoid  of  religion. 

The  habits  and  customs  of  a  people  organized 
upon  the  principles  advocated  by  some  of  the  most 
advanced  eugenists  without  any  tincture  of  religion 
at  all  would  make  all  men  behave  as  animals,  would 
make  everyone  follow  his  instincts  and  impulses, 
would  destroy  the  weak  and  the  useless,  would  send 
woman  back  to  serfdom  and  would  let  men  fight  to 
the  death  for  the  right  of  paternity.  The  fittest 
would  survive  and  brute  force  would  again  take 
possession  of  the  earth.  There  would  be  no  need 
for  eleemosynary  institutions,  no  need  for  hospitals, 
orphan  asylums,  reformatories;  there  would  be  no 
room  for  charity.  Physical  manhood,  physical 
womanhood,  and  erotism  alone  would  survive. 

But,  as  indicated  in  the  program  of  the  Interna- 
tional  Congress  on   Eugenics,   the   eugenist  would 
regulate  all  of  these  things  by  education  and  legisla-^i 
tion.    He  would  teach  men  and  women  what  is  best 


EUGENICS.  31 

for  a  vigorous,  healthy,  well-developed  race;  and 
if  this  would  not  suffice  for  eugenics,  he  would  enact 
laws  compelling  the  recalcitrants  to  submit  to  neces- 
sary regulations.  Legislation  seems  to  be  the  eugen- 
ist's  greatest  hope.  Ele  proposes  to  control  the  prop- 
agation of  the  human  species  by  law.  He  will  teach 
people  how  to  check  reproduction  without  bringing 
the  reproductive  impulse  under  submission,  and  if 
this  does  not  work  out  satisfactorily,  he  will  prevent 
reproduction  by  a  mutilation  of  the  body  without 
regard  for  the  individual's  inalienable  rights. 

Education  of  the  masses  is  a  Christian  measure 
and  has  its  foundation  absolutely  in  the  teachings  of 
Christ.  The  world  has  apparently  forgotten  the 
evolution  of  our  system  of  education.  To  try  to 
formulate  a  system  of  popular  education  on  a  purely 
physical  basis  would  be  an  irrational  proceeding. 
Man  as  an  animal  has  no  use  for  education  and 
would  not  find  enough  value  in  it  for  the  sacrifice 
which  it  demands.  It  would  therefore  be  impossible 
to  do  anything  for  eugenics  by  education,  except 
upon  a  foundation  of  religion.  Take  away  from 
education  the  idea  of  religion  and  the  principles  of 
Christianity  and  you  will  banish  it  from  the  face  of 
the  earth  in  much  less  time  than  it  took  Christianity 
to  build  it  up. 

What  can  the  eugenist  do  by  legislation?  Con- 
stitutions, laws  and  ordinances  represent  the  experi- 
ence, knowledge,  and  thoughts  of  a  people  in  the 


32  EUGENICS. 

matter  of  ethics.  Laws  and  ordinances  are  the  cus- 
toms and  habits  of  a  people  cast  in  the  mould  of 
experience.  They  are  the  ripe  wine  made  from  the 
grapes  grown  in  the  vineyard  of  God's  revelation. 
Constitutions  are  the  reservations  in  which  customs 
and  habits  still  prevail,  and  upon  which  laws  and 
ordinances  must  not  trespass.  They  are  the  grapes 
which  nourish  and  do  not  intoxicate,  and  they  are 
essential  to  human  liberty.  Excessive  laws  and  ordi- 
nances breed  bad  habits  and  customs  and  lead  back 
to  savagery.  The  logical  order  of  development  of 
civilization  is:  first,  religion;  second,  the  formation 
of  good  habits  and  customs ;  and,  third,  the  moulding 
of  these  into  laws  and  ordinances.  It  is  not  possible 
to  reverse  this  order  nor  omit  nor  change  any  of  the 
factors  in  it.  When  laws  and  ordinances  are  made 
which  transcend  the  habits  and  customs  of  the  people, 
without  a  solid  foundation  in  ethics,  they  are  made 
to  be  disobeyed  and  will  lead  to  immorality,  degen- 
eration, and  decline.  There  is  perhaps  nothing  more 
demoralizing  in  a  community  than  laws  and  ordi- 
nances which  are  disregarded  by  common  consent  of 
the  people. 

Although  laws  and  ordinances  are  under  social 
control,  they  have  no  value  for  the  uplift  of  man 
unless  their  lineage  goes  back  to  God's  authority 
through  the  religion  of  the  community.  Laws  and 
ordinances  originating  in  man's  thought,  knowledge, 
and  wisdom,  without  authority  from  God  and  with- 


EUGENICS.  33 

out  foundation  in  religion,  can  lead  only  to  man's 
confusion  and  degradation,  because  their  foundation 
is  in  selfishness.  The  moment  a  man  cuts  loose  from 
the  teachings  of  God  and  professes  himself  to  be 
merely  an  animal  without  a  soul,  responsible  to  no 
one  except  his  own  intellect  and  brute  force,  he 
assumes  an  attitude  to  his  fellow-man  which  he  can 
only  maintain  by  the  forces  to  which  he  subscribes. 
He  may  assume  the  position  of  a  god,  but  he  can 
bring  to  his  work  only  the  weakness  and  shortcomings 
of  his  human  nature. 

The  conception  of  society  as  an  aggregate  of  hu- 
man beings  composed  of  soul  and  body,  with  a  spirit- 
ual as  well  as  a  physical  nature,  dependent  upon  a 
supreme  being  from  whom  flows  all  authority,  gives 
us  a  philosophical  basis  for  legislation  in  the  interest 
of  eugenics;  but  the  conception  of  society  as  an 
aggregate  of  human  beings  composed  of  a  body 
without  a  soul,  without  a  spiritual  nature,  indepen- 
dent of  a  supreme  being,  gives  no  basis  for  anything 
except  disorder  and  confusion.  Animals  associate 
together  and  have  habits  and  customs  growing  out  of 
their  wants,  but  the  fundamental  principle  under- 
lying animal  society  is  self-preservation  and  the  grat- 
ification of  instinct,  so  that  selfishness  must  govern 
everything.  The  controlling  principle  of  human 
society  is  not  selfishness  but  self-control,  and  is  based 
not  upon  the  physical  part  of  man,  but  upon  the 


34  EUGENICS. 

spiritual  part.  Hence,  man  with  God  has  made  civ- 
ilization, and  man  without  God  has  made  savagery. 
The  difference  between  the  civilized  man  and  the 
savage  is  in  the  customs,  habits,  and  legislation  which 
religion  and  a  better  knowledge  of  God  have  gradu- 
ally brought  into  existence  for  the  civilized  man ;  rob 
him  of  his  spirituality  and  of  his  dependence  upon 
God  and  you  again  throw  him  back  into  a  state  of 
savagery. 

Civilization  is  a  very  delicate  plant  which  may 
easily  be  damaged  by  officious  cultivation.  It  has 
its  roots  in  the  eternal  truths  revealed  by  God,  and 
it  draws  its  nutrition  from  God's  revealed  word 
through  religion.  Deprive  it  of  its  proper  food  and 
supply  it  with  nutriment  from  the  brain  of  man  only 
and  it  will  soon  wither  and  droop.  If  man  will  at- 
tempt to  use  without  religion  the  agencies  under  social 
control,  he  undoubtedly  will  impair  the  qualities  of 
future  generations  rather  than  improve  them.  By 
ignoring  God  and  religion  he  lowers  the  standard  of 
ethics;  and  by  infringing  upon  the  constitutional 
rights  of  the  people,  and  by  the  enactment  of  laws 
and  ordinances  which  transcend  the  ethical  standard 
of  the  community,  he  will  wreck  civilization  in  his 
attempt  to  improve  the  racial  qualities  of  the  people. 

Some  of  the  practical  measures  which  have  been 
recommended  by  eugenists  for  the  improvement  of 
the  human  race  are :  the  limitation  of  the  size  of  fam- 
ilies by  artificial  preventive  practices,  the  enactment 


EUGENICS.  35 

of  more  liberal  divorce  laws,  the  abolition  of  mar- 
riage, and  the  sterilization  of  the  feeble-minded,  the 
insane,  and  the  degenerate.  All  of  these  measures 
are  in  conflict  with  the  teachings  of  Christianity  and 
with  sound  philosophy. 

The  limitation  of  the  size  of  families  is  an  exceed- 
ingly complicated  problem  which  may  easily  be  mis- 
understood. There  is  no  doubt  that  an  advantage 
accrues  to  children  born  of  the  same  mother  when 
a  long  interval  intervenes  between  births  to  give  each 
child  the  best  possible  conditions  for  nutrition  and 
normal  development.  An  interval  of  rest  between 
child-bearing  periods  also  favors  a  better  repro- 
ductive product.  It  is  likewise  true,  however,  that 
the  waste  of  reproductive  energy  which  goes  with 
the  limitation  of  reproduction  by  artificial  preventive 
methods  disqualifies  individuals  for  good  parent- 
hood, and  has  a  degenerative  influence  upon  any 
reproductive  product  that  may  take  place  thereafter. 
To  this  must  be  added  the  injury  which  must  come 
to  children  from  the  moral  degeneracy  of  parents  by 
whom  such  practices  are  followed. 

Divorce  is  essentially  unfavorable  to  eugenics,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  it  looks  to  be  in  favor  of  it. 
The  plea  which  is  made  for  divorce  is  that  it  relieves 
a  good  consort  of  the  occasion  for  reproducing  off- 
spring with  a  bad  consort.  This  view  of  the  problem 
is  too  superficial.  In  the  first  place,  it  does  not  follow 
that  because  a  couple  disagree,  the  offspring  must 


36  EUGENICS. 

be  bad.  Discordant  elements  in  the  parents  may  be 
neutralized  in  the  offspring  with  the  best  results.  In 
the  second  place,  when  divorce  takes  place,  the  chil- 
dren which  already  exist  and  the  children  which 
may  be  born  from  subsequent  unions  are  at  a  serious 
disadvantage  in  their  struggle  for  an  ethical  position 
in  society.  Statistics  show  that  there  is  an  extraor- 
dinarily high  percentage  of  children  of  divorcees  in 
our  reformatory  and  penal  institutions.  Lastly,  an 
injury  to  the  standard  of  morals  of  the  community 
ensues  upon  divorce,  which  weakens  the  moral  stam- 
ina of  a  great  many  in  matters  appertaining  to  sex 
relationship. 

Christian  marriage  gives  the  best  conditions  for 
eugenics  from  every  viewpoint.  It  must  be  Christian 
marriage,  however,  and  not  a  mere  mockery.  The 
Christian  end  of  marriage  implies  that  those  who 
enter  into  the  married  state  are  qualified  to  reproduce 
healthy  children,  that  they  have  Christian  forbear- 
ance for  each  other's  shortcomings,  that  they  are 
chaste  and  have  Christian  self-control,  and  that  they 
have  a  due  appreciation  of  the  duties  and  responsi- 
bilities which  go  with  the  married  state.  In  other 
words,  a  Christian  marriage  is  the  union  of  a  man 
and  woman  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  de- 
signs of  God  and  not  for  the  gratification  of  lust. 
When  the  eugenist  proposes  to  abolish  marriage,  one 
cannot  help  but  wonder  whether  he  is  perpetrating 


EUGENICS.  37 

a  subtle  joke.  To  propose  such  a  thing  seriously  is 
to  ignore  both  history  and  philosophy. 

The  sterilization  of  the  insane,  of  the  feeble- 
minded, and  of  the  degenerate  is  at  first  blush  a  very 
attractive  proposition,  but  it  will  not  bear  a  philo- 
sophical analysis.  As  an  assault  upon  man's  inalien- 
able rights,  it  should  be  frow^ned  down  upon  by 
every  one  who  loves  freedom.  It  has  no  justification 
in  medical  science.  Insanity,  feeble-mindedness,  and 
degeneracy  are  not  yet  well  understood  and  their 
transmissibility  from  parent  to  offspring  has  not  been 
proven.  That  such  individuals  should  not  be  allowed 
to  reproduce  offspring  can  be  defended  upon  other 
grounds  than  those  of  eugenics;  but  such  an  end  may 
be  reached  by  other  methods  than  by  sterilizar 
tion.  Segregation  will  do  all  that  sterilization  will 
do,  and  it  will  do  it  without  trespassing  upon  the 
inalienable  rights  of  man,  and  without  injuring  the 
moral  sense  of  the  community.  It  is  true  that  segre- 
gation may  be  a  greater  financial  burden  than  sterili- 
zation, but  we  must  not  forget  that  it  may  be  much 
cheaper  in  matters  of  this  kind  to  carry  a  financial 
burden  than  to  escape  it. 

What  is  the  relation  of  alcoholism  to  eugenics? 
Should  the  alcoholic  be  allowed  to  reproduce?  It 
has  been  claimed  that  alcoholism  is  due  to  a  form 
of  mental  degeneration  and  is  transmissible  from 
parent  to  offspring.     TTiis  has  not  been  proven  and 


38  EUGENICS. 

all  the  phenomena  of  alcoholism  in  successive  genera- 
tions can  be  more  logically  explained  in  other  ways. 
There  are  many  side  problems  connected  with  alco- 
holism, such  as  environment  and  waste  of  repro- 
ductive energy  on  account  of  undue  stimulation.  Al- 
coholism undoubtedly  should  be  treated  as  a  disease 
and  the  alcoholic  should  be  segregated  during  the 
time  that  he  is  suffering  from  the  disease,  but  there  is 
no  justification  for  making  him  non-productive  by 
sterilization.  Neither  is  alcoholism  a  good  ground 
for  divorce  in  the  interest  of  eugenics. 

The  teachings  of  Christianity  are  the  greatest 
power  for  eugenics  that  the  world  has  seen,  and  the 
Catholic  Church  as  the  visible  repository,  custodian, 
and  interpreter  of  those  teachings  will  have  to  be  the 
saviour  of  civilization.* 

The  world  needs  a  positive  religion  which  is  ca- 
pable of  reorganizing  society  so  that  each  member 
will  make  some  sacrifice  for  others  and  help  main- 
tain as  far  as  possible  equal  opportunites  for  all. 
Positive  dogma  and  strong  faith  are  necessary.  Man 
must  recognize  that  he  has  a  spiritual  side;  that 
there  is  a  relationship  between  him  and  his  maker; 
that  as  an  animal  he  wants  what  his  appetite  craves 

*  For  a  fair-minded  Protestant  view  of  the  influence  of 
the  Catholic  Church  upon  civilization,  see  Marriage  and 
the  Sex  Problem,  by  Dr.  F.  W.  Foerster,  translated  by 
Meyrick  Booth,  B.  Sc,  Ph.  D.  New  York:  Frederick  A. 
Stokes  Company. 


EUGENICS.  39 

and  instinctively  follows  what  his  instincts  suggest; 
that  he  must  cultivate  the  qualities  of  the  soul,  and 
keep  in  touch  with  God  through  religion  in  order  to 
control  his  appetites  and  direct  his  instincts  for  his 
own  physical  and  spiritual  welfare,  in  harmony 
with  the  spiritual  and  physical  welfare  of  his  fellow- 
man.  He  must  not  rely  upon  his  own  experience 
alone,  but  upon  the  experience  of  others — those  of 
his  own  generation  as  well  as  those  of  the  genera- 
tions \\hich  have  gone  before  him;  and,  above  all, 
he  must  rely  upon  the  revelations  of  God  to  man. 
He  must  seek  to  behave  like  a  rational  being,  in 
union  with  the  saints,  in  sympathy  and  harmony  with 
his  fellow-militants,  seeking  to  make  up  for  his  natu- 
ral shortcomings  by  supernatural  aids.  On  this  way 
alone  lies  the  hope  of  bringing  the  human  family  to 
a  higher  plane  of  physical  development,  of  intel- 
lectual perfection  and  of  social  betterment. 

Lawrence  F.  Flick. 
January  20,  191 3. 


U{ 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 

or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

BIdg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 

University  of  California 

Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 


ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

•  2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 
(510)642-6753 

•  1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing 
books  to  NRLF 

•  Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made 
4  days  prior  to  due  date 


\ 


i 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


SBNroMn.L 


OCT  1  3  2004 


U.  C.  BERKELEY 


DD20   1M  3-02 


Pamphlet 
Binder 

Gaylord  Bros..  Inc. 
Stockton.  Calif. 

T    ¥    Rtg    U    S.P^t   Oil 


<:Dbl337a55 


UlflVERSlTY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


